[extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes

[Brett Paatsch]

> > Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:

> ### Oh, the technology is patented already (as a preliminary
> patent) and will be described in articles soon, but it will take
> years before its clinical application. I really can't say anything
> more.

"Preliminary patent" seems like slightly confused lay-speak to me.
I don't think there is any legally significant subset in the set of all
US patents that is meaningful referred to as "preliminary".

I think the process that would be used in the circumstance you've
'outlined' would have been a provisional application for patent.
Such a thing can result in a patent but isn't one. 

I can see how that sort of process might get thought of as and 
expressed as a "preliminary patent" in lay-speak but the only other
person I've heard use "preliminary patent" as though it was a type
of patent was another Exi-list poster.   

Either I'm missing a term in the US IP vocabulary (which is possible
but I couldn't find it at the United States Patent and Trademark
Office  http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/provapp.htm  and its
not used in the biotech conference I've attended) or some Exi-listers
are using and passing on a sort of confusing lay-speak in relation
to patents. If so thats not a good thing and should stop. 

Is "preliminary patent" a valid legal phrase in the US or is it some
sort of lay-speak for ?

Regards,
Brett Paatsch